© 1999 by European Society of Cardiology
Internal low-energy cardioversion: A therapeutic option for restoring sinus rhythm in chronic atrial fibrillation after failure of external cardioversion
University of Marseille, School of Medicine Hôpital Nord, Marseille, France
AIMS: Conventional external cardioversion remains the technique of choice for restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF). Recent reports have suggested that internal low-energy cardioversion is efficient and safe in terminating AF in patients with failed external cardioversion.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In 20 of 118 consecutive patients with spontaneous chronic AF (>7/days), who underwent low-energy cardioversion, one or more attempts at restoring sinus rhythm with external cardioversion had failed. Low-energy internal cardioversion was performed under light sedation. Shocks were delivered (using an external custom defibrillator) between two nonapolar catheters positioned in the right atrium (cathode) and in the coronary sinus (anode). Heart disease was present in 12 and absent in eight patients (‘lone’ atrial fibrillation). Atrial fibrillation was established for a period ranging from 12 days to 53 months. Low-energy internal cardioversion restored sinus rhythm in 15 of the 20 patients (75%) with a mean energy of 4·5 ± 1·2 J, a mean conversion voltage of 355 ± 53 V and a mean impedance of 63 ± 8 ohms. No complications were observed. With a mean follow-up of 6 ± 7 months, 11 patients (73%) were in stable sinus rhythm.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence in support of low-energy internal cardioversion as a valuable therapeutic option in patients in whom conventional external cardioversion failed. This technique is safe and does not require general anaesthesia.
Key Words: Atrial fibrillation, internal cardioversion, atrial defibrillation, external cardioversion
Correspondence: Samuel Lévy, MD, University of Marseille, School of Medicine, Hôpital Nord, 13015 Marseille, France.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M.C.E.F. Wijffels, C.C.M.M. Timmermans, R.J. van Suylen, and L.M. Rodriguez Internal atrial shock delivery by standard diagnostic electrophysiology catheters in goats: effects on atrial electrogram amplitude and tissue architecture Europace, April 1, 2007; 9(4): 203 - 207. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S K S Lairikyengbam, M H Anderson, and A G Davies Present treatment options for atrial fibrillation Postgrad. Med. J., February 1, 2003; 79(928): 67 - 73. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Andraghetti and M. Scalese Safety and efficacy of low-energy cardioversion of 500 patients using two different techniques Europace, January 1, 2001; 3(1): 4 - 9. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Levy Internal cardioversion. Is it needed? How best to perform it? Europace, January 1, 2001; 3(2): 87 - 89. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Gasparini, A. Bonso, S. Themistoclakis, F. Giada, and A. Raviele Low-energy internal cardioversion in patients with long-lasting atrial fibrillation refractory to external electrical cardioversion: results and long-term follow-up Europace, January 1, 2001; 3(2): 90 - 95. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Ricard, S. Levy, G. Boccara, E. Lakhal, and G. Bardy External cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of biphasic vs monophasic waveform shocks Europace, January 1, 2001; 3(2): 96 - 99. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|